The passage makes the point that there are three theories of the explanation of the Chaco structures. On the contrary, the lecture demonstrates a controversy idea that these three theories are out of place.
To start with, contrary to the belief in the passage that Chaco structures were(is) purely residential, the professor says that the inside of the buildings cast doubts on living condition. Because there is no enough fire place for dong cooking, and there are only a few cooking rooms for only 10 families. Thus, the first reason for resident provided in the reading text is refuted.
In addition, the author holds the view that Chaco structures were used to store food supplies. In contrast, the lecturer contradicts the idea in the reading by saying that though maize is the important food supply for Chaco people, there is no evidence of maize container in the buildings after the excavation. This directly casts doubt on its counterpart in the reading.
Last but not least, the reading material states that Chaco buildings were used as ceremonial centers. On the other hand, the listening material presents a conflicting idea that pots may be the trash of the workersafter the meal. Besides the pots, there were also some building material like stone and sand, which are the trash of the construction materials. Therefore, the last possible explanation is totally unsounded, according to the speaker.
|